• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Herald Radio: A monument to irrelevance

T

thirdendorsed

Does anyone actually listen to Herald Radio? Is it me or has this been a total disaster? Could it be that more people listen to Sheperd on WCAP than the pathetic Meterparel on Herald Radio? Wasn't a Boston election its chance to gain a toehold? Was it not an election-season flop? Is this another example non-radio-people playing radio, like when the venture capitalists poured into the business in the 90s? Am I the only one who sees Herald Radio as 250-watt-daytimer quality programming, but over the Web? Shouldn't they be reading the "memorial notices" at 9:05? Shouldn't they have their own 'memorial notice' queued up?
 
Last edited:
I was listening to primary election coverage a few weeks back and then this past Tue I heard a couple hours of it (Joe Battenfield,
Howie, Jaclyn Cashman, Ray Flynn, Rev Rivers etc) and thought it was OK. Non-radio people--well, they had Katz do a show for awhile (now he does commentary), Battenfield not a radio person originally but had done some work on RKO, Howie there briefly. I wanted results and some talk about it and got it. Could have tuned to WBZ/Rea (or GBH, BUR) but BHR wasn't too bad for me--maybe not talk radio excellence but I don't think it was a disaster. I have heard small town talk radio (Merrimack Valley, Vermont, etc) covering
local issues and this was similar. Will it last? Who knows, but it may not be too expensive to produce.

(btw isn't "Great and Powerful Tom" Shattuck working as part of it, or is he just helping out Graham--whose show they carry? Shattuck did an op-ed in the Herald the other day.)

Comcast Cable had something on Ch 8 here in Beverly where a man and a woman were chatting about the results of the Beverly election, giving partial or full results for mayor/other races in various wards. It lasted about 15-20 minutes then I kept glancing at the TV and there was no sound, they were talking to each other, and a graphic said "we'll be right back". THAT seemed to run for 30 min or so till finally they went back to written
announcements. And when they WERE on it seemed a bit amateurish. At least I got the indication that Mike
Cahill would be the new mayor,etc
 
Last edited:
......... Is this another example non-radio-people playing radio, like when the venture capitalists poured into the business
in the 90s?..............

The newspaper folks were better in small doses. Back in the day (70s), WMEX/WITS had a success with Cliff & Claff (The Globe's Cliff Keane and Herald's Larry Claflin) doing sports and spun off a Herald-based show, The Bulldog Edition, which had columnists and beat reporters coming on and discussing the news that would be covered in the next mornings paper, hosted by Peter Iforgethislastname. The business was in transition, and was the last gasp of the old school press-card-in-the-hatband, knows-where-all-the-bodies-are-buried newfolks who were being replaced by the "I went to J-school, can you tell me where city hall is?" contingent. IIRC, this was the program which brought Majorie Eagan in local prominence.

Herald Radio appears to be a cure for which there is no known disease.

Regards,
TSB
 
thirdendorsed said:
Does anyone actually listen to Herald Radio? Is it me or has this been a total disaster?
Click to expand...

Admittedly, I have not listened much...but I give them "A" for effort for this concept and the launch.

The created another content source which could be more relevant to 35 yo's than their newsprint product is. It's just another ancillary part of the Herald....like their website, twitter feed, FB account, etc., etc. It also allows them to shove some things over there that need more in-depth discussion...with back and forth. (Let's face it, the Herald is getting thinner and thinner.)

Now, can they keep it operational and interesting with compelling content? That will be the next question. How will the product morph as time goes along?

If they can can keep 12 hours of it live/local (and interesting)..and repeat the other 12...maybe that might work. Right now the biggest draw is Michael Graham (costs them nothing). If they soon simulcast Howie's show...that would be a plus. I don't understand a sports show...as there are FOUR sports stations in Boston now...but, again, using their sports people is probably free.

I guess it's really a big math/money question. Can they generate enough revenue to cover expenses? Who knows for sure.

(We know they are not paying any "real" salaries over there.)

thirdendorsed said:
Is it me or has this been a total disaster?
Click to expand...

No, not at all. (I suppose it depends on what your expectations were.

Again, I give them "A" for effort.
 
Do you have any actual information on how many people are listening, or are you just assuming that because you don't like it that nobody else does?
 
Peter Lucas? Peter Lupo? Peter Meade?

Some newspaper websites are good for such things as a twitter feed for breaking news (fire, police action, election returns) and video
(the Herald has done a bunch of this--RKO tried it for awhile too). So if there's a big fire on Lewis St in Lynn, the Item will have raw
footage of it and maybe a couple interviews.
 
thirdendorsed said:
Does anyone actually listen to Herald Radio? Is it me or has this been a total disaster? Could it be that more people listen to Sheperd on WCAP than the pathetic Meterparel on Herald Radio? Wasn't a Boston election its chance to gain a toehold? Was it not an election-season flop? Is this another example non-radio-people playing radio, like when the venture capitalists poured into the business in the 90s? Am I the only one who sees Herald Radio as 250-watt-daytimer quality programming, but over the Web? Shouldn't they be reading the "memorial notices" at 9:05? Shouldn't they have their own 'memorial notice' queued up?
Click to expand...

You mean, just like the 97% or so of Internet "radio" stations out there?
 
I remember Jen Royle said on her first WEEI break "70% of what I say in day to day life I can't say on air"….too bad the other 30% isn't worth the listen.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom